587 réponses à ce sujet

[Ferretinabun]

Xilizhra wrote...

which conveniently is not a valid reason.

You mean it is not relevant to the Rite of Annulment decision, I presume?

Maybe, maybe not.

It makes a complete lack of sense.

It makes better sense than a mage/mage-sympathiser Hawke.

There is no way Hawke should get through Act 1 as a mage. We have several fights in front of Templars (Emeric and Cullen to name two) none of whom have any particular reason to look the other way. As a mage, the fact that they don't so much as comment on you flinging fireballs around is preposterous. 

And even as a mage-sympathiser, Act 3 gets rather weird. You are attacked repeatedly by the conspiracists in Best Served Cold who want to overthrow Meredith. Why would they attack you if you were on the side of the mages? The only way I can rationalise this is if you are openly on the side of the Templars and they have you down as one of Meredith's pawns.

[Xilizhra]

It makes better sense than a mage/mage-sympathiser Hawke.

Not in any universe. It makes no sense whatsoever with Hawke's family being what it is.

There is no way Hawke should get through Act 1 as a mage. We have several fights in front of Templars (Emeric and Cullen to name two) none of whom have any particular reason to look the other way. As a mage, the fact that they don't so much as comment on you flinging fireballs around is preposterous.

This has nothing to do with which side you favor. It's regrettable, but it's about class, not politics.

And even as a mage-sympathiser, Act 3 gets rather weird. You are attacked repeatedly by the conspiracists in Best Served Cold who want to overthrow Meredith. Why would they attack you if you were on the side of the mages? The only way I can rationalise this is if you are openly on the side of the Templars and they have you down as one of Meredith's pawns.

Poor communication kills. They think you're spying for Orsino and that he's trying to crack down on his own Circle to keep the others safe from Meredith. Keran and Thrask both admit that they screwed up in doing so.

[draken-heart]

Xilizhra wrote...

It makes better sense than a mage/mage-sympathiser Hawke.

Not in any universe. It makes no sense whatsoever with Hawke's family being what it is.

There is no way Hawke should get through Act 1 as a mage. We have several fights in front of Templars (Emeric and Cullen to name two) none of whom have any particular reason to look the other way. As a mage, the fact that they don't so much as comment on you flinging fireballs around is preposterous.

This has nothing to do with which side you favor. It's regrettable, but it's about class, not politics.

And even as a mage-sympathiser, Act 3 gets rather weird. You are attacked repeatedly by the conspiracists in Best Served Cold who want to overthrow Meredith. Why would they attack you if you were on the side of the mages? The only way I can rationalise this is if you are openly on the side of the Templars and they have you down as one of Meredith's pawns.

Poor communication kills. They think you're spying for Orsino and that he's trying to crack down on his own Circle to keep the others safe from Meredith. Keran and Thrask both admit that they screwed up in doing so.

And that fact that a mage does kill Hawkes mother, and a mage blows up the Chantry is not reason enough for hawke to see how dangerous magic can truly be?

[Xilizhra]

And that fact that a mage does kill Hawkes mother, and a mage blows up the Chantry is not reason enough for hawke to see how dangerous magic can truly be?

Not in the incorrect sense you refer to, no.

[draken-heart]

Xilizhra wrote...

And that fact that a mage does kill Hawkes mother, and a mage blows up the Chantry is not reason enough for hawke to see how dangerous magic can truly be?

Not in the incorrect sense you refer to, no.

and there is no reason to side with the mages unless making a nonexistent moral stand point. The veil in Kirkwall being as thin as it is makes it hard for me to think that mages deserve a chance at freedom in that city. I personally think that there should not have been a circle in Kirkwall to begin with, but whatever.

I just fail to see any logic in picking a side, mostly because my Hawkes are either rogues or warriors who try to play neutral on the concept, and feels no love for the Circle or templars (Bethany is almost always a warden for me, hardly a circle mage).

Modifié par draken-heart, 13 novembre 2013 - 07:10 .

[Xilizhra]

and there is no reason to side with the mages unless making a nonexistent moral stand point. The veil in Kirkwall being as thin as it is makes it hard for me to think that mages deserve a chance at freedom in that city. I personally think that there should not have been a circle in Kirkwall to begin with, but whatever.

The mages all leave the city in the end.

[draken-heart]

Xilizhra wrote...

and there is no reason to side with the mages unless making a nonexistent moral stand point. The veil in Kirkwall being as thin as it is makes it hard for me to think that mages deserve a chance at freedom in that city. I personally think that there should not have been a circle in Kirkwall to begin with, but whatever.

The mages all leave the city in the end.

That is not what I meant. I meant that the City of Kirkwall should have never had a circle AT ALL. I would side with the Templars mainly because I see no reason to do either side from a logical standpoint.

(Don't bring up the chantry mess, that was merely the straw that broke the camel's back, this problem was going on forever and has only just gone to  an explosion)

Modifié par draken-heart, 13 novembre 2013 - 07:16 .

[Xilizhra]

draken-heart wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

and there is no reason to side with the mages unless making a nonexistent moral stand point. The veil in Kirkwall being as thin as it is makes it hard for me to think that mages deserve a chance at freedom in that city. I personally think that there should not have been a circle in Kirkwall to begin with, but whatever.

The mages all leave the city in the end.

That is not what I meant. I meant that the City of Kirkwall should have never had a circle AT ALL. I would side with the Templars mainly because I see no reason to do either side from a logical standpoint.

Go neutral and Meredith attacks you.

[draken-heart]

Xilizhra wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

and there is no reason to side with the mages unless making a nonexistent moral stand point. The veil in Kirkwall being as thin as it is makes it hard for me to think that mages deserve a chance at freedom in that city. I personally think that there should not have been a circle in Kirkwall to begin with, but whatever.

The mages all leave the city in the end.

That is not what I meant. I meant that the City of Kirkwall should have never had a circle AT ALL. I would side with the Templars mainly because I see no reason to do either side from a logical standpoint.

Go neutral and Meredith attacks you.

She only says there is no neutral, and she does not attack at all. not until the end, when you were forced to make a choice.

[Ferretinabun]

Xilizhra wrote...

This has nothing to do with which side you favor. It's regrettable, but it's about class, not politics.

I suspect this is actually the root of where we differ. You want the game to facilitate your choices. I'm happy to make choices which facilitate the game.

[Xilizhra]

Ferretinabun wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

This has nothing to do with which side you favor. It's regrettable, but it's about class, not politics.

I suspect this is actually the root of where we differ. You want the game to facilitate your choices. I'm happy to make choices which facilitate the game.

My choices facilitate the game perfectly, rather better than yours.

[draken-heart]

Xilizhra wrote...

Ferretinabun wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

This has nothing to do with which side you favor. It's regrettable, but it's about class, not politics.

I suspect this is actually the root of where we differ. You want the game to facilitate your choices. I'm happy to make choices which facilitate the game.

My choices facilitate the game perfectly, rather better than yours.

And again, THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG. MORALITY IS NONEXISTENT! Both sides "facilitate" the game perfectly, and poorly.

Modifié par draken-heart, 13 novembre 2013 - 07:28 .

[Ferretinabun]

Xilizhra wrote...

My choices facilitate the game perfectly, rather better than yours.

What is it exactly about siding with the Templars that makes little/no sense to you, plot-wise?

[Xilizhra]

Ferretinabun wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

My choices facilitate the game perfectly, rather better than yours.

What is it exactly about siding with the Templars that makes little/no sense to you, plot-wise?

As previously mentioned, family history. It also makes you a gigantic hypocrite vis a vis Merrill, Anders, and either Bethany or yourself.

[draken-heart]

Ferretinabun wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

My choices facilitate the game perfectly, rather better than yours.

What is it exactly about siding with the Templars that makes little/no sense to you, plot-wise?

The mages did not blow up the chantry, and thus they are innocent/defensive noncombatants and the templars are pure evil who deserve to die.

Xili is a mage-lover who despises any sense of authority when it comes to mages/templars. And is blind to the fact that the blowing up of the chantry by a mage (Apostate or not) is the straw that broke the camel's back.

the fact that the game is merely a story within a story makes it hard to justify any side.

Modifié par draken-heart, 13 novembre 2013 - 07:42 .

[Ferretinabun]

Xilizhra - those are not plot problems. They are characterisation issues (and, I would argue, not insurmountable ones). There plot is simply the events of the story - and there are no parts of the plot that I can think of which make more sense for a mage/mage-sympathising Hawke than a templar-sympathising Hawke, and several which make less sense.

Draken-heart does make a good point though in that both sides are very difficult to justify morally.

[Xilizhra]

Xilizhra - those are not plot problems. They are characterisation issues (and, I would argue, not insurmountable ones). There plot is simply the events of the story - and there are no parts of the plot that I can think of which make more sense for a mage/mage-sympathising Hawke than a templar-sympathising Hawke, and several which make less sense.

If you want, but I can see none at all on the mage side that make less sense.

[draken-heart]

Xilizhra wrote...

Xilizhra - those are not plot problems. They are characterisation issues (and, I would argue, not insurmountable ones). There plot is simply the events of the story - and there are no parts of the plot that I can think of which make more sense for a mage/mage-sympathising Hawke than a templar-sympathising Hawke, and several which make less sense.

If you want, but I can see none at all on the mage side that make less sense.

What about best served cold? It makes a lot more sense with Meredith, as she is the knight commander, and thus has a right to investigate the issue. IT makes a bit of sense, but not much, as to why Orsino would do so unless he wanted to hide any blood mage from meredith by "gertting rid of them" and the fact that there are very few acknowledgements from the Templars of a mage!Hawke's abilities aside from the one where meredith says you proven yourself Kirkwall's defender, and minor ackowledgement where Meredith says you are not in the circle thanks to her being lenient on you for that.

[Xilizhra]

draken-heart wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Xilizhra - those are not plot problems. They are characterisation issues (and, I would argue, not insurmountable ones). There plot is simply the events of the story - and there are no parts of the plot that I can think of which make more sense for a mage/mage-sympathising Hawke than a templar-sympathising Hawke, and several which make less sense.

If you want, but I can see none at all on the mage side that make less sense.

What about best served cold? It makes a lot more sense with Meredith, as she is the knight commander, and thus has a right to investigate the issue. IT makes a bit of sense, but not much, as to why Orsino would do so unless he wanted to hide any blood mage from meredith by "gertting rid of them" and the fact that there are very few acknowledgements from the Templars of a mage!Hawke's abilities aside from the one where meredith says you proven yourself Kirkwall's defender, and minor ackowledgement where Meredith says you are not in the circle thanks to her being lenient on you for that.

As mentioned prior, poor communication kills.

[draken-heart]

Justification for templar-supporters: Mages are ticking timebombs who could become abominations at any moment, and Orsino hid the corruption of members of the circle so who knows how many are indeed corrupted? Plus, in Kirkwall, the veil is thin so the Templars need ot take control of the city.

Justification for mages: We did not blow up the chantry. We deserve a chance the Templar so rightly deny us, because we are potentially dangerous and could become abominations at any time. BUT, we did nothing wrong so the Templars are unjustified in being mean to us.

Seems like both sides are right and wrong.

Modifié par draken-heart, 13 novembre 2013 - 09:14 .

[dragonflight288]

draken-heart wrote...

Justification for templar-supporters: Mages are ticking timebombs who could become abominations at any moment, and Orsino hid the corruption of members of the circle so who knows how many are indeed corrupted? Plus, in Kirkwall, the veil is thin so the Templars need ot take control of the city.

Justification for mages: We did not blow up the chantry. We deserve a chance the Templar so rightly deny us, because we are potentially dangerous and could become abominations at any time. BUT, we did nothing wrong so the Templars are unjustified in being mean to us.

Seems like both sides are right and wrong.

Correcting justifications.

Mages-Meredith and the templars have been seizing power in Kirkwall illegally for three years, sentencing even non-mage family members and sympathizers to death without a trial by way of a templar-death squad and trying to solidify their power by overtaking the City Guard as well as not allowing the nobles to run the city as is their rights in society, nor does Meredith allow another Viscount to rise, openly stating she is the only one who is qualified to say when she gets to step down.

Templars: The city is overrun with blood mages, abominations are increasing in large numbers, and we don't know how many of our own templars have become abominations as well because of these free mages. Templars are needed throughout the city and with as much power as they can get so they can more effectively battle these maleficar and abominations effectively.

Both sides have their goods and their bads, and taken from a complete and strictly objective viewpoint, the templars have a lot of legitimate points about how bad it was. From the more modern viewpoints (and many in-game ones as well), the templars have made a power-grab and is effectively holding the city's politics hostage out of paranoia of the many blood mages, and there are MANY!

But overall in the end, the reasons Meredith give for her Annulment have no logic to them, from my perspective. She doesn't talk about how many blood mages there are. She doesn't try to convince Hawke that the Circle itself is corrupt and ireedemable (and according to the Codex, that's the qualifier to justify an Annulment.) She doesn't even talk about looking for evidence of mages who may have helped Anders or sympathized with him. Her only justification is "the people will demand blood." Nothing more is given as justification for the Annulment.

On such a flimsy reason, compared to "We had nothing to do with this!?!" I can't help but mainly side with the mages at this point in the game because Meredith essentially said she wans to commit genocide to appease a hypothetical mob, and that's her only justification. And if Kerras lives past Act 1, he mentions in Act 3 that Meredith had been appealing to the Divine for the authority for the Right of Annulment because Elthina didn't deem the Circle irreedemable and deserving of it.

[draken-heart]

dragonflight288 wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Justification for templar-supporters: Mages are ticking timebombs who could become abominations at any moment, and Orsino hid the corruption of members of the circle so who knows how many are indeed corrupted? Plus, in Kirkwall, the veil is thin so the Templars need ot take control of the city.

Justification for mages: We did not blow up the chantry. We deserve a chance the Templar so rightly deny us, because we are potentially dangerous and could become abominations at any time. BUT, we did nothing wrong so the Templars are unjustified in being mean to us.

Seems like both sides are right and wrong.

Correcting justifications.

Mages-Meredith and the templars have been seizing power in Kirkwall illegally for three years, sentencing even non-mage family members and sympathizers to death without a trial by way of a templar-death squad and trying to solidify their power by overtaking the City Guard as well as not allowing the nobles to run the city as is their rights in society, nor does Meredith allow another Viscount to rise, openly stating she is the only one who is qualified to say when she gets to step down.

Templars: The city is overrun with blood mages, abominations are increasing in large numbers, and we don't know how many of our own templars have become abominations as well because of these free mages. Templars are needed throughout the city and with as much power as they can get so they can more effectively battle these maleficar and abominations effectively.

Both sides have their goods and their bads, and taken from a complete and strictly objective viewpoint, the templars have a lot of legitimate points about how bad it was. From the more modern viewpoints (and many in-game ones as well), the templars have made a power-grab and is effectively holding the city's politics hostage out of paranoia of the many blood mages, and there are MANY!

But overall in the end, the reasons Meredith give for her Annulment have no logic to them, from my perspective. She doesn't talk about how many blood mages there are. She doesn't try to convince Hawke that the Circle itself is corrupt and ireedemable (and according to the Codex, that's the qualifier to justify an Annulment.) She doesn't even talk about looking for evidence of mages who may have helped Anders or sympathized with him. Her only justification is "the people will demand blood." Nothing more is given as justification for the Annulment.

On such a flimsy reason, compared to "We had nothing to do with this!?!" I can't help but mainly side with the mages at this point in the game because Meredith essentially said she wans to commit genocide to appease a hypothetical mob, and that's her only justification. And if Kerras lives past Act 1, he mentions in Act 3 that Meredith had been appealing to the Divine for the authority for the Right of Annulment because Elthina didn't deem the Circle irreedemable and deserving of it.

I take you do not spare andtalk to Kerras? HE mentions that the Right of Annulment was already sent for, so this problem goes way beyond the chantry blowing up. I see that as the straw that broke the horse's back for Meredith when it comes to magic, and not the Circle.

[dragonflight288]

draken-heart wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Justification for templar-supporters: Mages are ticking timebombs who could become abominations at any moment, and Orsino hid the corruption of members of the circle so who knows how many are indeed corrupted? Plus, in Kirkwall, the veil is thin so the Templars need ot take control of the city.

Justification for mages: We did not blow up the chantry. We deserve a chance the Templar so rightly deny us, because we are potentially dangerous and could become abominations at any time. BUT, we did nothing wrong so the Templars are unjustified in being mean to us.

Seems like both sides are right and wrong.

Correcting justifications.

Mages-Meredith and the templars have been seizing power in Kirkwall illegally for three years, sentencing even non-mage family members and sympathizers to death without a trial by way of a templar-death squad and trying to solidify their power by overtaking the City Guard as well as not allowing the nobles to run the city as is their rights in society, nor does Meredith allow another Viscount to rise, openly stating she is the only one who is qualified to say when she gets to step down.

Templars: The city is overrun with blood mages, abominations are increasing in large numbers, and we don't know how many of our own templars have become abominations as well because of these free mages. Templars are needed throughout the city and with as much power as they can get so they can more effectively battle these maleficar and abominations effectively.

Both sides have their goods and their bads, and taken from a complete and strictly objective viewpoint, the templars have a lot of legitimate points about how bad it was. From the more modern viewpoints (and many in-game ones as well), the templars have made a power-grab and is effectively holding the city's politics hostage out of paranoia of the many blood mages, and there are MANY!

But overall in the end, the reasons Meredith give for her Annulment have no logic to them, from my perspective. She doesn't talk about how many blood mages there are. She doesn't try to convince Hawke that the Circle itself is corrupt and ireedemable (and according to the Codex, that's the qualifier to justify an Annulment.) She doesn't even talk about looking for evidence of mages who may have helped Anders or sympathized with him. Her only justification is "the people will demand blood." Nothing more is given as justification for the Annulment.

On such a flimsy reason, compared to "We had nothing to do with this!?!" I can't help but mainly side with the mages at this point in the game because Meredith essentially said she wans to commit genocide to appease a hypothetical mob, and that's her only justification. And if Kerras lives past Act 1, he mentions in Act 3 that Meredith had been appealing to the Divine for the authority for the Right of Annulment because Elthina didn't deem the Circle irreedemable and deserving of it.

I take you do not spare andtalk to Kerras? HE mentions that the Right of Annulment was already sent for, so this problem goes way beyond the chantry blowing up. I see that as the straw that broke the horse's back for Meredith when it comes to magic, and not the Circle.

And he says Elthina denied it. So Meredith tried going over Elthina's head. It wasn't sent for, it was requested and denied.

[draken-heart]

dragonflight288 wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Justification for templar-supporters: Mages are ticking timebombs who could become abominations at any moment, and Orsino hid the corruption of members of the circle so who knows how many are indeed corrupted? Plus, in Kirkwall, the veil is thin so the Templars need ot take control of the city.

Justification for mages: We did not blow up the chantry. We deserve a chance the Templar so rightly deny us, because we are potentially dangerous and could become abominations at any time. BUT, we did nothing wrong so the Templars are unjustified in being mean to us.

Seems like both sides are right and wrong.

Correcting justifications.

Mages-Meredith and the templars have been seizing power in Kirkwall illegally for three years, sentencing even non-mage family members and sympathizers to death without a trial by way of a templar-death squad and trying to solidify their power by overtaking the City Guard as well as not allowing the nobles to run the city as is their rights in society, nor does Meredith allow another Viscount to rise, openly stating she is the only one who is qualified to say when she gets to step down.

Templars: The city is overrun with blood mages, abominations are increasing in large numbers, and we don't know how many of our own templars have become abominations as well because of these free mages. Templars are needed throughout the city and with as much power as they can get so they can more effectively battle these maleficar and abominations effectively.

Both sides have their goods and their bads, and taken from a complete and strictly objective viewpoint, the templars have a lot of legitimate points about how bad it was. From the more modern viewpoints (and many in-game ones as well), the templars have made a power-grab and is effectively holding the city's politics hostage out of paranoia of the many blood mages, and there are MANY!

But overall in the end, the reasons Meredith give for her Annulment have no logic to them, from my perspective. She doesn't talk about how many blood mages there are. She doesn't try to convince Hawke that the Circle itself is corrupt and ireedemable (and according to the Codex, that's the qualifier to justify an Annulment.) She doesn't even talk about looking for evidence of mages who may have helped Anders or sympathized with him. Her only justification is "the people will demand blood." Nothing more is given as justification for the Annulment.

On such a flimsy reason, compared to "We had nothing to do with this!?!" I can't help but mainly side with the mages at this point in the game because Meredith essentially said she wans to commit genocide to appease a hypothetical mob, and that's her only justification. And if Kerras lives past Act 1, he mentions in Act 3 that Meredith had been appealing to the Divine for the authority for the Right of Annulment because Elthina didn't deem the Circle irreedemable and deserving of it.

I take you do not spare andtalk to Kerras? HE mentions that the Right of Annulment was already sent for, so this problem goes way beyond the chantry blowing up. I see that as the straw that broke the horse's back for Meredith when it comes to magic, and not the Circle.

And he says Elthina denied it. So Meredith tried going over Elthina's head. It wasn't sent for, it was requested and denied.

it was denied because Elthina did not care about Kirkwall, and as long as the chantry itself is not harmed, neither should Meredith care.

Idealism or Pragmatism are the only reasons to make a choice on any side.

Modifié par draken-heart, 20 novembre 2013 - 01:57 .

[dragonflight288]

it was denied because Elthina did not care about Kirkwall, and as long as the chantry itself is not harmed, neither should Meredith care.

Idealism or Pragmatism are the only reasons to make a choice on any side.

Did no care about Kirkwall? Is there evidence or dialogue that supports this, or is this merely your opinion?